FRS vs Mil Issue Radios

[chrisf]

Working in retail electronics tech services, I see piles of returned product every day. Literally.

In the civvie world, 'defective' returns are 70-90% NFF (No Fault Found)

-- Of course, many of these are for questionable reasons, as they get refunds..

I couldn't see military kit sent for service being very often without fault.

I've seen plenty of kit returned un-repaired (Though not to blame the techs nessiscarily, very likely a break down somewhere in the chain on the way to the techs)

Also had techs tell me repeatedly that somthing wasn't broken when it was (Until they eventually relented, actually CHECKED the equipment, and found it broken) and tell me what I said was the problem wasn't it (And generally their "solution" doesn't work and they're back a second time to actually fix what I told them was wrong).

Recently we had a truck returned to us as having been fixed... an electrical problem with the pod... so we checked the pod... still had the same problem... went inside the cab of the truck to move it, and there were the new parts for the truck, sitting on the seat of the truck, brand new, still in the box.\

Like I said, somtimes it's a problem with the techs, and somtimes it's a problem with the supply chain returning it to the techs...

 

[GAP]

We had a checkout procedure that stepped through every module on the equipment. I went along until the problem was found...was fixed..then the checklist was started again thru to completion. Then it was passed on to the gunny for QC. He went through the checklist again, plus anything else related to the complaint he could think of. We took pride in our accuracy and speed. I have seldom worked with a better team since then.

 

[couchcommander]

We had a checkout procedure that stepped through every module on the equipment. I went along until the problem was found...was fixed..then the checklist was started again thru to completion.

Indeed, it's a very good way of doing things.

We have a similar system where diagnostics are run and systems manually checked for the most common points of failure no matter what the initial complaint was.

Intermittent problems are a nightmare however.

Happens more frequently than you'd think too. Surprisingly, a lot of tech work, at least with computers, is intuition and experience. "Hrm, the diagnostics say there is nothing wrong, yet this machine will occasionally generate a disk read error on boot..... feels like a pws problem."... (your standard tester doesn't actually load the pws - so as long as it has the correct voltage with no load it will return a ok.. testing rigs exist to load the pws - we don't use them. Too much risk of being electrocuted in our small lab. We'd rather replace the 20 dollar pws.)  Also, thanks to our records, we know that *certain* products are more likely to suffer *certain* failures, and certain conditions, while possibly being a wide number of things, are *most likely* caused by certain failures.

Not 100%, but more often than not they point you in the right direction.

 

[luismariano]

Just my 2 cents,
Many public safety agencies around the country have been modernizing their communications equipement for the last 10 years or so.

From personal experience, I know many of the older RCMP radios have DES encryption.  Handhelds like the Motorola Saber or Ericsson M-PA/M-PD are pretty rugged, have lots of nice features (like emergency key) and you can reprogram them relatively easily from a laptop with a RS-232 serial port.  Batteries, chargers, speakermics and keyloaders are readily available and reasonably priced.

I know it might be wishful thinking on my part, but instead of having these radios sold at a federal auction wouldn't it be better to give (or sell?) them to the army so they can have a second life serving our country instead of ending up on Ebay and some of you guys having to resort to  FRS/GMRS?

Granted that some of these radios will have frequency splits outside what the military normally uses, but at least you get to choose a working channel outside consumer allocated frequencies and have reasonably secure voice crypto.

Luis

 

[Ex Ranger Instructor]

From personal experience, I know many of the older RCMP radios have DES encryption.  Handhelds like the Motorola Saber or Ericsson M-PA/M-PD are pretty rugged, have lots of nice features (like emergency key) and you can reprogram them relatively easily from a laptop with a RS-232 serial port.  Batteries, chargers, speakermics and keyloaders are readily available and reasonably priced.

I've used the Sabres before while on exercise in the States.  They do work well, but they aren't the answer.

Granted that some of these radios will have frequency splits outside what the military normally uses, but at least you get to choose a working channel outside consumer allocated frequencies and have reasonably secure voice crypto.

The frequency problem is pretty big.  I don't believe that the Sabre in particular can be programmed to use low band VHF (30- 50MHz), so they would be incompatible with our IRIS system.  Furthermore, we can't just take any old frequency we want- we'd be intruding on bandwidth allocated for Police and Emergency Services.  As I've said repeatedly in this thread, we have to stay in our own lane with regard to frequency spectrum use, and that's one of the reasons we aren't supposed to be using FRS in the first place.

 

[chrisf]

I've used the Sabres before while on exercise in the States.  They do work well, but they aren't the answer.

If the RCMP radios are the same as our Sabres, and the RCMP is getting rid of theirs, they'd be a great thing to get ahold of... not as an alternative for tactical comms, but just because our stocks of Sabres are dwindling, and the manufacturer no longer produces them...

 

[DG-41]

As I've said repeatedly in this thread, we have to stay in our own lane with regard to frequency spectrum use, and that's one of the reasons we aren't supposed to be using FRS in the first place.

Given the choice between not being able to talk to my troops, and stepping on the FRS frequency, that's a no-brainer.

Don't want me to use the FRS? Then give me a damn radio that WORKS.

DG

 

[chrisf]

Hopefully they will... word on the street is that TCCCS is being abadoned... for what? Harris radios (The purchase for afghanistan was only a start... again, word on the street)

 

[Jay4th]

Just my 2 cents.  I am almost always of the same mind as GO!!.  Here it comes.  Through 13yrs in the Infantry with a break in the middle as a crewman  I have NEVER had legacy or TCCC radios perform anywhere near the ranges quoted in  the manuals  NEVER.  15-20 km for a 522 in a LAV, amped or not. BULLS@#T    I am the closest thing to a comms guy in my platoon having been a signaller fot many years, I can get a CI to do whatever I want WHEN THE 522 WORKS.  Every time we marshall to go outside the wire, radios that worked yesterday, all of a sudden dump crypto or lost net ID or some damned thing.  GOD help you if you turn on SAS.  The sky really does fall then.  What is this crap about the 521 being for section internal comms?  Were they gonna give us 10 per section, in THE WHOLE INFANTRY?  Yea right.  I couldn't carry enough batteries if I tried.    The bottom line is you damned near have to be an electrical engineering technologist to get TCCC to work, or keep working.  We in the infantry do get the full version of the course but the guy isnt gonna be a signaller for his whole career.  We dont have the time for all the set up synchronizing, ensuring they have the same FLASH?,.  Sig ops guys, we don't blame you guys for the radios, but don't defend the crap.
    In feb I got a 1 day course on the 117 from a 20 year old American kid.  I can make it do what I want every time, and it always works.  It does Sat comm too.  Every platoon there has em and all meaningful comms goes through em.  If we had trays for em we would gladly drive over the 522's. We all have PRR and the section commanders get the one with the tail to plug into a 521.  Aside from the 521, PRR works great.  We also get issued civvy etrex legend gps.  We dont wear issued TAC vests and when none of the good kit isnt available at home on ex, we use  FRS.  This is the reality.

 

[buzgo]

Hopefully they will... word on the street is that TCCCS is being abadoned... for what? Harris radios (The purchase for afghanistan was only a start... again, word on the street)

I've heard that too. General Leslie mentioned that comms gear was a priority. I'm pretty sure that you will see more 117's and probably MBITRs start coming into the system. I hear that the army has a bunch of heavy satcom gear too - enough that they could push it to the BN level!

If it really happens, it'll be about time that someone has seen the light and made the right (and courageous!) decision to walk away from it all. We've been trying to jury-rig and make it work for 7 years!

 

[chrisf]

    In feb I got a 1 day course on the 117 from a 20 year old American kid.  I can make it do what I want every time, and it always works.  It does Sat comm too.  Every platoon there has em and all meaningful comms goes through em.  If we had trays for em we would gladly drive over the 522's. We all have PRR and the section commanders get the one with the tail to plug into a 521.  Aside from the 521, PRR works great.  We also get issued civvy etrex legend gps.  We dont wear issued TAC vests and when none of the good kit isnt available at home on ex, we use  FRS.  This is the reality.

There's enough systems out there *off the shelf* that meets the needed standards for military use (Secure, reliable, durable) that we could completely replace TCCCS... as in ALL the junk that came with TCCCS, not just the radios... hopefully we'll be seeing it sooner or later. Definitly no one wants to admit that TCCCS was a waste of money...

 

[couchcommander]

Dumb question time....

Do they not field test this stuff before they decide to blow hundreds of millions (billions?) of dollars on it??

 

[buzgo]

The system was designed starting in the late 1960's and production started in the early 90's. It was intended for use in northern Europe... We're not the only country that has ended up with a system like this. The Germans have a battlefield microwave system that uses gigantic repeater towers - not very adaptable for use in Afghanistan! Another problem is that we kept trying to add technology to the system as tech advanced. Unfortunately there came a point where they had to stop and PRODUCE something. So in 1999 we ended up with 486 and Pentium workstations running SCO Unix with a Windows 3.11 virtual machine using a low speed LAN to interconnect the vehicles.

Things WERE field tested but alot of the time it seemed like the results were ignored. I remember hearing a lot of "Well the system works on the test bench in the lab." and "They can't figure it out so its up to us (the Army) to figure it out and make it work as best we can."

yeah, right.

 

[couchcommander]

So in 1999 we ended up with 486 and Pentium workstations running SCO Unix with a Windows 3.11 virtual machine using a low speed LAN to interconnect the vehicles

... oh my god.

 

[a_majoor]

As has been suggested in the past, we are barking up the wrong tree. We started the TCCCS program back in the stone age, when "communications" and "radio" were synonymous. Now we need to send data and information across the net, but the origional systems were never designed to do this, and multiple layers of add ons make this less rahter than more possible.

There is also the matter of multiple conflicting requirments to remember. Satcoms have limited numbers of channels available, crypto enabled devices need some pretty complex hardware and software, more range = more TX power, operating in a military environment requires ruggedized, shock and water resistent housings......A GARMIN RINO costs about $400, and a Blackberry even less, but they only have a few of the desirable features for a military radio. A MILSPEC GARMIN RHINO would be far bigger and far more expensive (although I suspect it would still be an order of magnitude less than a 522).

If I were in charge of the program, you would be seeing hardened LINUX tablet PC's with wireless network cards, embedded GPS and VoIP instead of "radios" to transmit data and information. Platoon and Company signallers would be carrying wirless routers to go with the system, and your C/S would be your URL.......

 

[Carbon-14]

wireless networks (802.11) are still a work in progress in some respects.  What was thought to be secure within a year ago can now be hacked in seconds.  IMO its not quite mature enough for classified information.  But I would definately expect a move in that direction as well as "Software Communication Architecture"

 

[couchcommander]

WPA provides, right now as far as I know, secure communications (either with 802.1x (EAP-TLS)... my preferred, or PSK even if you want). I don't know enough about WPA2 to comment.

WEP is broken.

In the end, I really don't understand why you guys don't just use TCP/IP w/ TLS based systems.

I mean, a_majoor hit the nail on the head with the linux - you can pretty much get the kernel to boot on anything... xboxs, cell phones, PSPs....if you really want to spend money you could develop your own hardware using off the shelf parts, put linux on it, throw TCP/IP w/ TLS over some type of datalink and physical layer (I'm no engineer), and bob's your uncle.

802.11g is good, but awfully jammable and shortrange. It'd probably be good to go with something different to put the rest of your network on top of.

 

[Carbon-14]

There are now tools available on the net to crack WPA networks.  Hence the movement to WPA2.  But it requires new hardware.  You're right that its easily jammed.  Its also very susceptible to denial of service attacks.  Its very easy to spoof a packet telling a client to disconnect from the network.

**edit : spelling**

 

[couchcommander]

There are now tools available on the net to crack WPA networks. 

Really? Hrm, I must be behind.

Do you know some of the specifics or do you have a link, I'd be interested to know.

 

[buzgo]

Harris (but of course!) makes type-1 encrypted 802.11 devices:

http://www.govcomm.harris.com/secure-comm/

There is also a good artice at Signal magazine (the AFCEA publication):

http://www.afcea.org/signal/articles/templates/SIGNAL_Article_Template.asp?articleid=1000&zoneid=163

a_majoor: I've seen devices similar to what you are describing. I was at a demo that General Dynamics ran and they had their C4 systems running on linux and windows based COTS laptops, as well as milspec handhelds. They use a mesh architecture - it was very impressive. I gather that they did live testing in Iraq and were very pleased with the results.

There are lots of things out there, we just need to sort out our procurement and shake up the C and E branch a bit to get the ball rolling!

CC: The Auditor linux distro has a WPA cracker (or 2) to play with. Its a live CD so you don't even have to install.